3 ms·
> even London wasn't the London one supposed to have been done cheaply and effectively, in contrast to the splurge of the previous two?
by riffraff 6y ago
> even London
wasn't the London one supposed to have been done cheaply and effectively, in contrast to the splurge of the previous two?
- gamblor956 6y agoEffectively: no. Cheaply: no. The London Olympics had a final budget of roughly $13 billion, or nearly double the original forecast of approximately $6.5 billion. For comparison, Beijing cost $40 billion, Athens cost $11 billion, and Rio cost $13.1 billion. Note that these are just the budgets for the games themselves, not including ancillary spending on other non-game infrastructure. For comparison, the combined total of LA's three Olympics (adjusted for inflation and including the forthcoming games) is well below $10 billion.
- riffraff 6y agoI see, I must have remembered the forecast budget, thanks.